Alpine Industrial Landscapes Transformation - Project Handbook

These programmes channel the resources for the objective
of transformation through different priorities, for example
environmental, cultural heritage or tourism development,
energy transformation et cetera. Available options are
only moderately used by the partners, depending on their
experiences with the transformation process. As the most
problematic factors hindering utilisation, regional partners
identified lack of connections to potential project partners,
too demanding application forms, lack of human capacity and
lack of expertise and know-how. Although named by almost
all partners, however not for all the incentives, these factors
should be addressed by the EU or by the national institutions
by better disseminating the information and offering relevant
trainings.
Having this in mind, the logical conclusion is that more
targeted instruments would make access funds easier
because partners could stay focused and would not need to
diversify their efforts to access the funds. Also, the national
governments should put more effort into directly supporting
the transformation of the regions, not only by analysing
their characteristics and preparing databases as is the case in
Slovenia, but also by means of direct financial incentives.
Regarding the administration framework, the major role in
the transformation process has been designated to the local
level. There is a difference in the intermediate administrative
organization for which the French have several bodies
supporting inter-municipal governance and thus rely more
on the bottom-up approach to redevelopment. The three
other countries, however, continue to apply more top-down
approaches to transformation. In Slovenia, the largest role
in the transformation process is expected from the Regional
Development Agencies, the regional institutions in charge
of the preparation and implementation of the regional
development programmes as the main policy document for
supporting access to EU funds. Otherwise, the municipalities
take on the major role in the spatial planning process. Thus,
the municipalities should be the ones to work on their
skills and knowledge to support the transformation and
the financial incentives should be made user-friendly for
municipalities to access. The skills, listed by the partners as the
most important for the transformation process are strategic
thinking, marketing, promotion and business settlement,
creative thinking and financial expertise.
The current transformation practices mostly include partial
solutions and only cover the preliminary phases of the
transformation including physical rehabilitation of a degraded
area or preparation of a strategy. Since no comprehensive
approach to transformation is applied, regional agencies are
obliged to seek resources for short-term or “soft” solutions.
This situation might also be due to the fact that brownfield
regeneration requires substantial effort and financial input
which investors and/or public stakeholders are not able to
provide, thus they resort to partial solutions. In order to
overcome such “ad hoc” approaches, the policy assessment
concludes with five key policy recommendations as presented:
1. In strategic policies on all governance levels,
brownfields should be recognised as an opportunity
and a regional potential, instead of a burden for
localities and regions.
2. The EU, regional and local communities need more
targeted policies and incentives, supporting very
different aspects of the transformation of industrial
landscapes.
3. The Alpine context is not decisively influencing the
transformation of industrial landscapes; the only
relevance is in the governance setting, experience of
partners and potential of the good practice exchange.